argument47 [自由女神小组第13次作业]

hemaUID: 2190745

ARGUMENT47 - Scientists studying historical weather patterns have discovered that in the mid-sixth century, Earth suddenly became significantly cooler. Although few historical records survive from that time, some accounts found both in Asia and Europe mention a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperatures. Either a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding with Earth could have created a large dust cloud throughout Earth's atmosphere that would have been capable of blocking enough sunlight to lower global temperatures significantly. A large meteorite collision, however, would probably create a sudden bright flash of light, and no extant historical records of the time mention such a flash. Some surviving Asian historical records of the time, however, mention a loud boom that would be consistent with a volcanic eruption. Therefore, the cooling was probably caused by a volcanic eruption.

In this argument, the author attempts to convince us that the earth suddenly became significantly cooler in the mid-sixth century was probably caused by a volcanic eruption. To support this assumption, the cites the evidences that some accounts found both in Asia and Europe mention a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperatures. He also claims that no extant historical records of the time mention such a flash. However, as it stands, this argument renders unconvincing because it relies on unsubstantiated assumptions.

first of all, whether earth became cooler in the mid-sixth century remains suspect. When the author claims these things, he does not give us any evidence such as daily written by people at that time, or the fossil about the period. as the author does not give any evidences to substantiate the assumption, it is possible that it is not true but a lie the scientists just tell in order to deceive the public. In this case, all the conclusions based on this assumption are unsubstantiated. So without giving out any evidences to support this assumption, the claim is unwarranted.

Secondly, even if the author can substantiate the foregoing assumption, the author overlook the possibility that neither the volcanic nor meteorite colliding would have created a large dust cloud throughout Earth’s atmosphere. The author just claims that two of them are the probably reasons cause the whether changed but the author does not tell us any information about how he think this. Without showing out any believable evidence to substantiate this conclusion, it is entirely possible that maybe other reasons cause the whether become cooler.

In the third place, the author insists that no extant historical records of the time mention such a flash and some surviving Asian historical records of the time mention a loud boom that would be consistent with a volcanic eruption. However, the evidences are worth to be doubt. As the author said no record about the flash, I want to ask that does he have search every place in order to find out the reason of the earth became cooler. If he does not give out any credible support that there is no such record all over the world, I may think the record mentioned such a flash is exist but the scientists did not discover them. Moreover, the historical records mentioned a loud boom that would be consistent with a volcanic eruption is doubtful. As it said a loud boom that would be consistent with a volcanic eruption, there is no clear evidence to support this assumption. It is entirely possible that the loud boom is the sound made not by volcanic but other things which we have no ideas now.